「傷痕文學」的存在就是為了回應毛主席的「下鄉運動」。其主要目的是取消和解構文化大革命、利他主義、毛主義，甚至中華人民共和國本身。
我相信鄧小平（文化大革命的主要目標之一）完美地概括了這一流派及其粉絲——「哭哭啼啼，沒有出息」（「發牢騷、沒用」）。
我們來談談下鄉運動。
早在六○年代，中國就受到資本主義和共產主義集團的製裁。糧食安全是一個大問題。城市沒有足夠的工作（或食物）供所有受過教育的年輕人使用。同時，農村地區缺乏教育和發展。所以毛澤東做了唯一合理的事──他把年輕的知識分子送到鄉下，讓鄉下人分享他們的知識；透過加入農業勞動力，那些享有特權、養尊處優的城市年輕人可以體驗到現實世界的嚴酷，所以最好不要變得太高高在上或脫離群眾。
1963年，中國大陸只有57%的人接受過初等教育；到 1976 年，96% 的人都這麼做了。相較之下，同期印度公民受過初等教育的比例僅從40%上升至58%左右。總而言之，政策起到了應有的作用。
習主席本人就是那些「流放」到鄉村的城市青年之一。與許多同齡人不同，他發現這段經歷很有啟發性。
不幸的是，這並不適合所有人。幾千年來，中國社會一直秉持「萬般皆下品，唯有讀書高」的信念。知識分子一向認為自己「凌駕於」老百姓之上，他們必須在田間勞作，並在與勞動者相同的條件下生活，被視為一種巨大的侮辱。這種情緒催生了傷痕文學，當時的知識分子哀嘆毛澤東統治下的「苦難」。
對底層民眾的徹底蔑視是傷痕文學的常見主題。這些小說中描繪的農民和工人從來沒有表現出同情心或「英雄」的光芒，而總是表現得毫無感情、落後和野蠻。推而廣之，他們推論（或暗示）中國人民一定有什麼問題，與政治、文化甚至遺傳有關。
但事實是，當時大多數農村人都很尊重有文化的城市青年，甚至親切地稱他們為「毛主席的寶貝」。他們為這些年輕人提供最好的食物和住宿，並經常讓他們免於從事最艱苦的工作。
不幸的是，雖然大多數人相處得很好，但「傷痕文學」類型卻被認為特別忘恩負義。他們鄙視鄉村主人，對他們的一言一行都感到冒犯，整天沉浸在自憐之中，嚮往在家鄉享受的奢侈和特權。
是什麼讓文學偉大？其一，所討論的作品必須超越其產生的環境，探索即使在未來也能引起人們共鳴的人物、主題和普遍主題。傷痕文學作為一種文學體裁失敗了，因為它未能引起大眾的共鳴——無論是那些沒有經歷過文革的人，還是那些經歷過文革的人。
它之所以失敗，是因為每一篇傷痕文學小說在敘事方式上都極其自戀和主觀，只關注作者或（自我插入的）主角的感受和經歷，而把周圍的人當作漫畫和NPC，他們無視中國的物質現實，只顧自己不科學、自私的幻想。這顯然是政治驅動的，而不是由性格驅動的，向唱詩班佈道意味著疏遠其他人。
用鄧的話說，「愛發牢騷，沒用」。
近年來，中國嬰兒潮世代的傷痕文學已成為千禧世代和Z世代普遍嘲笑的對象，因為年輕一代在自由化經濟下有自己的「傷痕」。
今天的年輕人環顧四周，看到一個努力學習和工作不再保證成功的中國（由於腐敗和裙帶關係）；在中國，擁有自己的房屋或企業比以往任何時候都更具挑戰性（因為大公司和房東會從一切中抽成）；在中國，精英階層脫離群眾，將他們（不義之財）的財富藏匿在海外，並教導年輕人“更加努力地工作”，並為自己的傳統感到羞恥；在中國，工作報酬不高，滿意度低，心理健康問題猖獗。
中國面臨毛主席大約半個世紀前預見和警告的確切問題。
「你們對（中國反動派）評價太高了，他們對資本主義了解多少？他們頂多把中國帶回半封建半殖民地國家。資本主義透過入侵其他國家並掠奪他們的財富來累積資本來運作。修正主義走資派敢侵犯誰？中國不被侵略就謝佛了！他們能做的就是與帝國主義國家勾結，剝削和壓迫自己的人民，或低價出賣自己國家的資源，以滿足自己無底線的貪婪。他們在外人面前軟弱、妥協，在內部則懲罰性、嚴厲。最糟糕的是，不僅是國內的資本家如此，黨內的眾多寄生蟲也如此，它們變成一個整體，把整個社會吸乾。 ~ 毛主席，1972 年
你猜怎麼著？原來，那些對今天的年輕人「留下傷痕」的人，正是那些不斷抱怨自己「傷痕」的人。
今天的年輕人（不僅在中國）比嬰兒潮世代的階級意識要強得多，從他們的角度來看，傷痕文學之類的問題在於其創作者和追隨者的傷痕還不夠。儘管毛主席並不完美，但他確實比他的時代領先了至少50年，那些忽視他智慧的人將自食其果。
看：
The Wumao Club
· Sep 3
Why is Wolf Totem so popular in China despite being anti-CCP?
You have to understand that the “Wolf Totem” novel was first published in 2004, and times were different back then. One major issue Chinese people used to face was the desertification of the north, which led to severe dust storms in places like Beijing. Years of industrialisation, over-reliance on fossil fuels, and other types of human activity in both Inner and Outer Mongolia were to blame for this. For almost a decade, the whimsical “green” fantasies peddled by Chinese environmentalists and liberals became widely discussed among Chinese youths. It was during this special period in Chinese history that “Wolf Totem” became popular. The story delved into a lot of environmentalist themes, such as when the (Han Chinese) farmers killed all the wildlife of the Inner Mongolian steppes, forcing the local wolf packs to resort to hunting the farmers’ livestock out of desperation, which led to their ultimate demise when the People’s Liberation Army troopers shot them all at the farmers’ request. The subsequent overgrazing of the grasslands led to worsening desertification of the region. There was another similar and extremely controversial work that came out around the same time – “Under the Dome” (2015), a documentary produced by the journalist Chai Jing. In retrospect, this documentary was basically China's equivalent of Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" - a semi-factual presentation of pollution and climate change that relied too much on sensationalism and liberal moral outrage. Back in the 2010s, few things gave western liberals a raging boner more than the sight of smoggy Asian skies, stern Asian men in uniform, and demure Asian women crying about oppression. In both cases, the works themselves had hidden agendas – “Under the Dome” basically called for China to be de-industrialised and forego its quest for energy security; “Wolf Totem” constructed a false narrative of Mongols being like “wolves” and the (Han) Chinese as being like “sheep”, promoted the idea that “wolves” ought to cull “sheep” to keep their numbers in check, and thanked the Mongol invasions of the past for “improving” the genes and culture of the Chinese people (by killing off “weak” Chinese men and raping Chinese women). While “Under the Dome” was rightfully banned in China, “Wolf Totem” flew under the radar due to the Chinese government’s tolerance (or in this case, over-tolerance) for its ethnic minorities, and willingness to turn a blind eye towards their chauvinistic tendencies (which unfortunately culminated in incidents such as the Xinjiang terrorist attacks of the 2010s, perpetrated by Islamic fundamentalist groups and other unsavoury elements). It is noteworthy that the book has been criticised in Germany for promoting Fascist ideals, and protested by ethnic Mongols in China for fabricating a false myth that Mongols worshiped wolves - as common sense dictates, a nomadic people that relied on herding sheep for their livelihoods wouldn’t exactly take a liking to the very creature known for preying on sheep. There is a saying that goes something like this - “Every rooster thinks the sun rises because it crows”. This is especially true when it comes to (Chinese) liberals. A lot of liberals credited Chai Jing for raising awareness on air pollution, which was why the Chinese government took actions to address the problem, such as implementing a new “pollution charge” targeting construction sites in 2015. In reality, this policy had nothing to do with her documentary, but was rather already in the works since 2006. Additionally, the Chinese government already published a white paper on tackling climate change in 2008; and in 2012, there was another white paper on developing green energy. Today, in 2024, China leads the world in green tech, and is the only major country on earth that’s actually doing something to tackle climate change. The smoggy skies of Beijing are pretty much a thing of the past. As for the wolves of Inner Mongolia – China’s restoration of the native wolves and their natural habitats remain one of the most successful examples of conservation in the world today (most impressively, China is the first country in the world to successfully clone the endangered arctic wolf). The Chinese government was so successful in this endeavour, in fact, that local ranchers are complaining once more about wolves being a menace to their livestock. They couldn’t hunt the wolves that come near, as wolves are still classed as a Class II protected species in China. China has shown the world the way forward - that it is possible to improve both the lives of your people and the environment with development and science. The pseudo-scientific and “spiritual/naturalistic” woo-woo of liberalism deserves all the mockery it gets. I am reminded of those immortal words by Teddy Roosevelt - “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better”. The cocky rooster can declare “the sun has set forever” if it so wishes, but the red sun of the east shall rise irregardless. See:
Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord
· 1yWhy did Mao start the Cultural Revolution?
A cloud had been forming for the space of fifteen hundred years; at the end of fifteen hundred years it burst. You are putting the thunderbolt on its trial. ~ “Les Misérables”, Victor Hugo The CPC was correct in identifying the root of all evil - private ownership of public resources, which always leads to consolidation of private entities against the interests of the masses. But Mao was one of the few in the CPC who saw that the same evil was corrupting the Party itself from within. As was typical of all previous Chinese dynasties, the founders of a new dynasty tried to secure the futures of their own offspring by giving them special privileges - guaranteed positions in public institutions, unearned stipends/accolades/passive income, etc. Mao was a true communist in that he believed people should be equal. He was anything but corrupt or nepotistic. He sent his own son to fight and die in the Korean War, when he could have kept him safe in Beijing and next-in-line as national leader. Not too many national leaders, not even Chinese ones, would do that today. Stalin was of a similar character, if you recall - when he died, they found that his personal possessions were basically a few coats, a couple packs of cigarettes, a diary, and a handkerchief. As for his successors, well…there was this old Soviet joke about Brezhnev that goes something like this: he showed his mum his fancy mansion, cars and enormous wealth, and she responded with “That’s nice, son, but what will you do when the Bolsheviks come?”. The problem was that Mao had no way of fixing this problem except to mobilise the masses with ideology. It was the only time-tested way of getting things done back then (and probably nowadays as well…we’ll get to that in a bit). But as with any mass movement, things inevitably get out of hand, and innocent people get victimised. So where you stand on the legitimacy of the Cultural Revolution is going to depend on your experiences, ideology and beliefs. Most people in China (whose material lives have improved significantly since the end of the Cultural Revolution) would probably agree that the movement was overall a negative, and best not repeated again in any way, shape or form. On the other hand, a lot of old people, and an increasingly large number of young folks (like myself) think that the damages caused by the Cultural Revolution have been purposefully exaggerated by the bourgeoisie, domestically and overseas (partly due to the fact that China made some of its greatest scientific, economic and diplomatic breakthroughs during this period); China’s first satellite, the Dong Fang Hong 1, 1970 that the PRC did not collapse like the USSR during the capitalist reforms thanks to the leftist mass movement; that the problems Mao saw long ago are getting worse (for fuck’s sake even the landlords have returned); and that we should explore ways to deal with them, but in a better way than Mao did. As for how exactly we’re going to do that…I have no idea. I know President Xi is trying to do something about it, and even declared inequality the “主要矛盾/primary conflict” of the nation. I know some people think industrialisation, technology and AI will eventually solve everything. I’ve argued before that the machines won’t solve anything, as long as it’s cheaper and more convenient to throw human lives at a problem. Maybe it’ll have to come back to the masses taking matters into their own hands? Guillotines, pitchforks and nooses? I dunno. I hope it doesn’t come to that. But if things get bad enough, it’ll happen anyway. FYI, the Selected Works of Mao Zedong are some of the best selling e-books among young Chinese people today. That should tell you something. Young people in the streets of Xi’an, singing the Internationale See:
Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord
· 2yWhy does China crack down on celebrity online culture?
Because it turns out that most people in China don't like it when celebrities groom children online (i.e. lure them into having sex). Or see their children mimic degenerative speech patterns and antisocial behaviour, or glorify narcissism, mindless consumerism and debauchery. I'm pretty sure a lot of people around the world share similar views on celebrity culture, degenerates, and the profiteering predators who enable it all. The difference is, the Chinese actually do something about it, in a way that doesn’t kill the entertainment industry. There was a time when celebrities and artists were respected in China. No, not in ancient times. Under the old Confucian moral structure, society was divided into nine “grades”, where entertainers were held in the same regard as prostitutes. 婊子無情, 戲子無義 - “a whore is not capable of love, just as a performer has no capacity for honour”. The problem with artists in antiquity (and even modern times) was that they always sought the patronage of the wealthy and the nobility, catering to their preferences instead of those of the common folk, in increasingly servile manners (often including sexual favours). They also sought to enhance their reputation by creating performances that were so incomprehensible and inane, in an effort to come across as more "avant-garde" and “refined” than the lowly masses. The traditional stigma against artists only began to disappear under socialism. The communists understood that performance arts is a crucial component of a healthy, modernised society, and good art was supposed to resonate with the common folk instead of alienate them. That's how modern classics like The White Haired Girl came to be. Adapted from old folklore in the Chinese heartland, showcasing the ordinary lives of ordinary people in an art form (ballet) that is traditionally seen as "pompous", and filled with songs that are not only sung in the way the common folk sang, but are also of such excellence, they are still sung today. When a Chinese person hears the lyrics “O how the north wind blows, O how the snow flake flutters” (北風那個吹, 雪花那個飄), we are instantly reminded of Chinese New Year. The bar was set extremely high for artists under Maoism. Not only did they have to be experts at their craft, but they also needed to be role models for the rest of society. Respectable in every way. 人民藝術家 - “Artists of the People”. For the first time in Chinese history, we began to address entertainers respectfully as "老師" ("teacher"). This was a miracle made possible by generations of hard work from artists and bureaucrats. The biggest problem with the Maoist vision for the arts, however, is that you can't shit gold. Good art is hard to make, and there is only so much of it that you can create within a short period of time. People's choices for entertainment were extremely limited and monotonous, and even good art feels repetitive after a while. The capitalist reforms, as well as the liberalisation of Chinese politics, meant that the government no longer has as much oversight on the arts. Mainland China began to copy the celebrity-manufacturing mechanisms of Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan and South Korea, i.e. over-production, marketing-bombardment, manipulation of algorithms, etc. The rise of technology and social media also means that anyone with a phone could attain 15 minutes of fame. In spite of all the accusations of over-zealous censorship, government oversight in China continued to wane, to the extent that the bar has been set so drastically low, people are actually nostalgic for Mao-era performers, movies and music. How does any of this horse shit appeal to mentally sound and ordinary people? How am I supposed to address any of these fuckstains as “teacher” without puking? China is on the verge of losing all respect for entertainers, just as we did in antiquity. Don't blame “censorship” - these people brought it on themselves. Instead of spending time and effort to produce good art, they make a mockery of our sensibilities, tastes and IQ. Instead of contributing to society, they do drugs, start beef, sell their bodies to the highest bidder, groom under-aged fans, have orgies with hookers, drink-and-drive, and evade taxes. Instead of putting the people first, they present themselves as being above the rest of us, living life large in the most obnoxious ways possible. I'm not saying we need to return to the Mao-era way of producing art. But if a little bit more government oversight is needed to curb the degeneracy, and prevent our society from descending into idiocracy like elsewhere, then so be it. See:
Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord
· Aug 28Can Chinese netizens in Quora explain the recent controversy about children's mathematics textbooks?
TLDR: it reveals just how deeply the country has been infiltrated by external and internal forces that wish nothing but ill upon its people. I wonder how many of you still remember the Xinjiang separatist textbook scandal. It was discovered that pro-independence textbooks have been used in Xinjiang schools since around 2004. These textbooks were full of made-up stories of how Han people persecuted the Uyghurs - most notably a fictional tale of seven Uyghur women jumping off a cliff in their fight against the People’s Liberation Army. Ironically, this story directly plagiarises the actual history of the PLA, in the form of the Five Heroes of Langya Mountain, who all jumped off a cliff instead of surrendering to the Japanese. Textbooks such as these are responsible for indoctrinating a whole lot of kids with extremism, and breeding terrorism in the region. They are directly responsible for incidents such as the 2009 Urumqi Riots, and the 2014 Kunming train station attack. They were later found to be the handiwork of the likes of Sattar Sawut, former Education Minister of Xinjiang, who was a pan-Turkic nationalist and Islamic fundamentalist, and connected to US-backed terrorist cells in Central Asia. The textbooks were used and circulated for well over a decade before the censors finally found fault with them - they were only able to do so after Sawut retired. This is the destructive power of colour revolutions and “peaceful evolution”. It’s hard for westerners to understand this. They tend to think the Chinese are being paranoid or zealous or on a “witch-hunt”. This is understandable, because no foreign nation is trying to beat the westerners at their own game, by “peacefully evolving” the westerners on their own turf. They simply don’t know what it’s like to be on the receiving end of it. Which brings us to the People's Education Press math textbook scandal. The textbooks in question - the ones where all the children have Down Syndrome and raging boners - have been in circulation since 2013. People had bigger problems back then, and didn't really pay attention. But now that this has been brought to light, parents are beginning to dig through their kids' textbooks thoroughly, and finally we are beginning to realise just how deep and insidious the problem is. This picture, for instance, was found in one language textbook about the story of Lei Feng - a folk hero known for his every day acts of kindness, such as carrying old women who are too frail to walk. The man in the photo isn't him though, but a Japanese invader during WWII. It's an obscure piece of Fascist wartime propaganda. Whoever chose this picture did so deliberately. By now you must be asking, "who's doing all this"? This is the guy responsible for the artwork in the controversial math textbook. He’s an art designer named Wu Yong. He holds some..."interesting" ideas about his people. For instance, in the interview you see above, he talks about how the Chinese have "inferior genes" due to our substandard way of life. In another interview, he admits to purposefully challenging the boundaries of publication standards, as a way to resist the political authority. Yes, that’s literally what the juvenile erections are for - freedom, rebellion, and democracy. And he’s getting paid by the government to do so. So basically this guy is what we call "河殤派", a follower of the River Elegy. The short explanation is that Chinese people who grew up around the 80s have this notion that China is doomed, its civilisation is fundamentally inferior, its people are genetically flawed, its government is the worst thing ever, and that wholesale westernisation (immigrating to the west, becoming honorary-whites, etc) is the only way out. Which certainly explains why the textbook goes out of its way to praise the beauty of blonde hair and blue eyes. The River Elegy faction is relatively small, but influential. They're made up primarily of westernised and liberal intellectuals, who dominate policy making, judiciary, media, education, and various other sectors of Chinese society. This should be very familiar to those of you from the developing world, where there is typically a dichotomy between the petite-bourgeoisie, who present themselves as more enlightened and morally superior than everyone else, and the “unwashed” masses who resent them. Do you understand why China's censorship is so strict now? It's because people like these exist. Right now I’ve got good news, and bad news. The good news is that the censors are now working overtime to review older copies of textbooks and educational material, and the people have become more aware that shit like this is happening everywhere in their lives. The upper middle class and their “wokeism” have never been more unpopular in a long time. The bad news is that liberals have been sabotaging the censorship mechanism as well. The same way they have done so every time - when the people and the government demand a review on certain harmful material, they deliberately go overboard by censoring everything else that isn’t harmful, so that public opinion turns against censorship entirely, and anyone who is against the harmful material in the first place is branded an ignorant populist and a government stooge. Thus, said harmful material becomes normalised. As for myself, I am increasingly appreciative towards Mao for what he was trying to do with the Cultural Revolution. A2A Chathurka Madhushan Edit (1 June): This answer has been collapsed for “adult content”. No, the irony is not lost on me. See:
As a fun little exercise, I tried submitting this post to several of the “pro-democracy”/anti-China spaces on Quora: The ironically-named “China Uncensored” was quick to censor my posting (whereas the much less high-profile “Fact-Check China” did not - kudos to moderator Da Chin Lim for at least practising what he preaches). That said, one of the moderators, Kev, was courteous enough to give me a reason: Turns out that the student in my above post acted in a way that he believed to be…shall we say, a wee bit rude. You know, because if there's one thing activists for freedom and democracy need to be mindful of, it is this: the need to be respectful towards their elders and superiors, follow the rules of society, and not upset the establishment and status quo. Somehow I doubt they'd react the same way towards, say, Hong Kong students torching their own schools to protest “CCP brainwashing”. Alright, time for some context. A secondary school in Hefei, Anhui Province invited a famous scholar, Chen Hongyou/陳宏友, to give a speech to the students. Prof. Chen expressed some…curious viewpoints, including but not limited to: * to marry white and black people to improve the genes of the Chinese nation * to study hard so that they can make tonnes of money, and have their pick of spouses from all over the country, rather than being limited to their childhood sweethearts in their hometowns * to leave China for the west after they graduate, and never return The lad who ran up stage had this to say: “He has nothing but money in his eyes. To him, studying is all about money. He is servile to the west, and self-hating. What is the point of studying? It is to make China a better place! “ This is actually a great snapshot into the generational divide in China. Chinese boomers tend to believe China = bad and doomed, Chinese civilisation and genes are fundamentally flawed and inferior, its politics is brutal for the sake of being brutal, and wholesale westernisation is the only way forward. These people hold great power in every level of Chinese society - they're our teachers, our entertainers, our artists, our news editors, even our policy makers. Whereas Chinese millennials and zoomers are more patriotic, confident in themselves and their heritage, and are even more pro-socialism than young people in the west - The Select Works of Mao Zedong are some of the best selling e-books among young Chinese people. This generational conflict is mostly kept online rather than out in the open, due to Chinese culture's emphasis on proper etiquette. However, sometimes shit gets so ratchet that the conflict manifests itself in a very heated and eye-catching way like in this case. What is particularly interesting to me, is that for the longest time, we've been told by so-called “China-experts/fact-checkers” that Chinese students lack “critical-thinking skills”, are incapable of independent and original ideas, and are fearful/subservient towards those in power. And yet when we are presented with live examples that this is clearly not the case, they quickly dismiss these examples. Why? Because “freedom of thought/expression” doesn't count unless what you are thinking and expressing is exactly what these people want from you. Young Chinese people, much like their boomer predecessors, are dissatisfied with many aspects of the People's Republic - except instead of hating their own country, culture and countrymen, they look for other solutions, in a way that the western establishment disapproves of. You have the freedom to hold your own opinions, as long as they are the same as my opinions. If not, then prepare to get accused of human rights violations, sanctioned, toppled, bombed, or all of the above. That's western/neoliberal democracy in a nutshell, people. For me at least, seeing my fellow youths stand up for themselves like this is most uplifting. It reminds me that, as bad as things may seem in my country sometimes, as long as the youth of China is not lost, China will never be lost. May the youth of China be rid of indifference, and move forward, paying no heed to the words of those who wallow and mope. Those who can do something, do it, those who can say something, say it. - Lu Xun, Chinese author See: What is a globohomo? Can Chinese netizens in Quora explain the recent controversy about children's mathematics textbooks? What is China (Shanghai lockdown) doing wrong about the covid policy?
https://www.quora.com/profile/Lonely-Cantonese-Sith-Lord/As-a-fun-little-exercise-I-tried-submitting-this-post-to-several-of-the-pro-democracy-anti-China-spaces-on-Quora-Th?ch=17&oid=101018626&share=1575695e&srid=lrL9e&target_type=post
新增評論...
謝謝你寫這篇文章。欣賞它。
“他們所能做的就是與帝國主義國家勾結，剝削和壓迫自己的人民，或者低價出賣自己國家的資源，以滿足自己無底的貪婪。”
這正是印度或南半球許多其他國家的運作方式。不幸的是，許多人不知道或不在乎他們正在掠奪自己的人民。
